Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Koto Okubo

:{{la|Koto Okubo}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Koto_Okubo Stats])

:({{Find sources|Koto Okubo}})

Since there is no policy that says that the oldest person in Japan or the fourth-oldest in the world is automatically notable, this article fails WP:N's requirement of non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent third-party sources. All three sources on the page are nothing more than trivial mentions of the individual and, considering that she was anonymous up until a few days ago, it's highly unlikely that the necessary sources exist to satisfy the requirements in either Japanese or English (and I couldn't find any). Normally I might suggest merging, but there's nothing encyclopedic here that isn't available already at Oldest people or any other related longevity lists. The only real information is her name and birth date, the rest is just trivia. Canadian Paul 18:41, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

:Comment. This seems to be borderline to me. The issue is not whether age is inherently notable, but how much coverage there is. A search of Japanese sources comes up with coverage in several dozen independent third-party sources (for instance, [http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/national/news/CK2012091402000271.html], [http://www.47news.jp/47topics/e/234547.php], [http://sankei.jp.msn.com/life/news/120914/trd12091414130017-n2.htm], [http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXNASDG13069_U2A910C1CC0000/], [http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20120914/k10015029031000.html], [http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/News/Sp201209140114.html], [http://www.worldtimes.co.jp/today/kokunai/120915-6.html], etc. etc.). Most, however, only mention her in a sentence in an article on the current aged population in Japan, although some give several sentences on her current condition (thus taking up about 10% of the article length). In WP:N, the borderline between trivial and non-trivial is unclear, since it allows that the subject "need not be the main topic of the source material", but doesn't specify how much is needed for something to become significant. I am leaning towards keeping this because there are enough articles that give her a few sentences. And while this itself is not reason to keep, I think it is very likely that when she dies, all the news services in Japan will report that, thus giving her dozens of articles in which she is the main topic--and thus clearly enough coverage to deserve an article. Michitaro (talk) 23:57, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

:Comment An issue that concerns me with many articles such as this are the so-called "Longevity milestones". Surely many/all of these must constitute original research unless there is a citation which specifically mentions that a milestone has been reached and is therefore notable? If these, and other uncited claims in the lede, are discounted from this article is there anything worthwhile left? DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 00:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

:Comment I added some information about her. --高木あゆみ (talk) 06:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

• Merge into List of Japanese supercentenarians - Which has a short section at the end for individual biographies where this belongs if anywhere. It's not like Kinsan Ginsan where the individual has a profile as Tarento. The only distinguishing aspect of this individual is advanced age. A stand-alone article is unnecessary and has no room for expansion. Jun Kayama 02:45, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
• Merge into List of Japanese supercentenarians as above. The article here contains minimal biographical information and is padded out with information about other "oldest people". News coverage is basically WP:BLP1E, and general notability is not really established. --DAJF (talk) 13:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
• Merge into List of Japanese supercentenarians as above. Seems the most sensible course of action.
• Merge into List of Japanese supercentenarians per above comments. I don't think age is a claim to notability (isn't that in an essay somewhere?) Nevertheless, since there does seem to be some coverage of her, so we can probably merge info about her somewhere. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 15:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.